A Possible Technical Hypothesis Behind the Air India Express Boeing 787 Incident at Cochin (June 2025)

By Pedro Pires Aviation enthusiast and Mechanical Engineering student, Aeronautical branch

— -

Disclaimer: This is an independent technical hypothesis based solely on public information and prior case studies. It is not intended to replace official investigation results, but rather to explore a potentially relevant scenario based on observed patterns and system interactions.

— -

Context

On June 12th, 2025, an Air India Express Boeing 787-8 crashed shortly after takeoff from Cochin International Airport. Preliminary video footage shows the aircraft climbing briefly before entering a stall and descending rapidly. There are no visible flames or evidence of clear engine failure in the video.

A surviving passenger reported hearing a “metallic boom” shortly after liftoff, and the aircraft appeared to keep its landing gear extended until impact. No significant corrective movement of control surfaces is visible, suggesting a possible systems failure.

— -

Observations Based on Public Information

• Aircraft appears to stall moments after takeoff.
• No visible engine fire or thrust asymmetry.
• “Metallic sound” reported by a survivor.
• Landing gear does not appear to retract.
• No observable control surface corrections during stall.

— -

Hypothesis: Combined Fuel and Hydraulic Failure

A potential scenario involves a rupture in a fuel line during or shortly after rotation. This could:

• Produce the metallic boom reported;
• Lead to sudden loss of fuel feed to one or both engines;
• If the rupture occurred near hydraulic lines, as often seen in nacelle or wing-root architecture, it could cause additional systemic damage;
• Result in failure of landing gear retraction, control surface actuation, and stabilizer trim.

This interaction between systems could explain the aircraft’s inability to climb, control pitch, or recover from stall.

— -

Hypothetical Sequence of Events

1. Aircraft rotates and begins normal climb;
2. A rupture in a fuel line causes a loud metallic noise;
3. Fuel flow is disrupted to one or both engines → thrust loss;
4. Hydraulic lines near the rupture are damaged: -Control surfaces respond sluggishly or freeze; -Stabilizer trim becomes fixed or ineffective; -Landing gear remains extended;
5. Aircraft enters high angle of attack → stalls;
6. Pilots unable to recover at low altitude due to lack of control authority.

— -

Supporting Historical Precedents

• Qantas QF32 VH-OQA (A380): Engine explosion caused multi-system damage (hydraulic, fuel, electrical). https://www.faa.gov/lessons_learned/transport_airplane/accidents/VH-OQA
• United 232 N1819U (DC-10): Engine disintegration led to complete hydraulic loss; only limited control remained. https://www.faa.gov/lessons_learned/transport_airplane/accidents/N1819U
• Japan Airlines 123 JA8119 (747): Structural failure ruptured all hydraulics, resulting in total loss of control. https://www.faa.gov/lessons_learned/transport_airplane/accidents/JA8119

These incidents show how one physical failure can rapidly compromise multiple redundant systems, particularly in high-pressure environments like engine nacelles and wing roots.

— -

Conclusion

While speculative, this scenario aligns with visual data and survivor accounts. The interaction between fuel and hydraulic systems in modern aircraft designs makes this a technically plausible sequence of events.

It is recommended that official investigators evaluate:

• Integrity of fuel and hydraulic systems near engine mounts;
• Damage patterns in stabilizer and control actuators;
• Flight data (FDR) and cockpit voice recordings (CVR) for early-system anomalies.

— -

Pedro Pires Aviation Enthusiast | Mechanical Engineering Student (Aeronautics)

Air India AI171 VT-ANB (B787)